I spend $35 per month for unlimited data, talk, and text. The speed is reasonable, if not spectacular, and it only works in cities... but for my purposes, that works well for me! Tethering is also explicitly allowed.

That reply was directed at a troll that I wasn't interested in feeding. I'm not sure what you're getting at with regard to people living near lakes, but I'll try to give my own argument for why this research station is important, based upon my layman's understanding of the science.

There is a need for long term longitudinal studies on environmental pollutants and how they affect freshwater ecosystems. Canada has huge freshwater reserves, and with world supplies of fresh water constantly falling, it makes sense to keep our eye on how such systems respond to external stresses, whether that be phosphates (the most commonly cited result from that station), acidification, excreted hormones, heavy metals, or otherwise. If only a single policy change comes out of such studies, leading to (for example) decreased energy and resource use for water treatment, increases in freshwater fish stocks, a greater understanding of which filter plants should be used in artificial wetlands, or (heaven forbid) a higher standard of living for communities living near such ecosystems, then I'd call it a success. Any of those could potentially lead to decreased spending in the future.

Might I be wrong? Yes, clearly! But $2 million per year is a relatively small amount, and I trust that the scientists who actually use data from this research station know what they're talking about. I'm clearly no scientist, but I think I do a pretty good job of reading sources objectively.

I'm not a blind ideologue, and I understand that budgets are limited. I just have a hard time justifying shuttering such a reputable research station while spending $140 million on commemorating the War of 1812 - that's just an example, everyone has their own target for wasteful spending. Granted your priorities may not be mine; I hope I've done at least somewhat of a decent job at "articulating why the science is needed" and why I think this is worthy of federal spending.

Thanks so much for the respectful and constructive reply. I'd try to type up a coherent response about long-term economic risks associated with short-term cuts to environmental research, but that might be too much of a strain on my less than half a brain.

I'm a supporter of SETI in principle, though I can't say I've ever supported it materially (other than a brief run at SETI@home when I was in university). Unfortunately I think it's simply a matter of priorities during economic downturn.

Up here in Canada, we have a program that also costs $2 million a year - the Experimental Lakes Area research station - and it's getting its funding cut by the federal government. It's upsetting to me, as I see valid science being disregarded in the name of fiscal responsibility.

That aside, the SETI program is likely to run, in one form or another, for the entirety of human existence. It may get shut down periodically, but this is not a question that's going to go away. Ever. Perhaps when our collective economies rejig themselves to be less focused on growth and more on sustainability, we can find room for a relatively cheap, pure science initiative. Until then, either donate directly to those initiatives you find appealing, or take whatever action you can at the ballot box. Or both, if you're feeling less apathetic than most of us!

Slightly off-topic, but to avoid making Toronto even more of the center of the Canadian universe than it already is...

The Globe & Mail is only a Toronto newspaper insofar as it's published in Toronto and is utterly obsessed with the Toronto Maple Leafs. It would be much more appropriate to label it a national newspaper, as it's read and distributed throughout Canada, and attempts (not always successfully) to provide a balanced perspective from all regions.

And a cool guy.

This is a side story. My first email address was on Ottawa freenet circa 1994. At the time I was massively into Pratchett's Discworld series, and I had found mention somewhere of a fold-out wall map of Discworld. Not understanding exactly how the world was supposed to work, I managed to hunt down Pratchett's email address (I'm afraid I don't have a clue where I found it) and sent him a note asking if he knew where such a map was available in Canada.

Two days later, he wrote back telling me he wasn't really sure, but let me know of a few shops he knew of in America that sold Discworld merchandise and thanked me for reading. I printed that email out (the first email I ever printed) and put it in a box for safekeeping. It's still there.

What a thrill for a 14 year old kid!

Exactly right.

I constantly harass my friends to stop contacting me via facebook (which I enjoy for other reasons) and just use email instead. I can keep all my messages centralized, filed, and secured. The FB messaging service is, of course, a complete joke. But even if it was brilliantly designed and my privacy fears allayed, what happens when FB disappears and the next big thing comes along? Are all those messages gone? Will there be a way to export them in an open format? Somehow I doubt it.

Email is a fundamental part of the internet, and I don't see it going anywhere. At least, I damn well hope it doesn't - because as you point out, the alternative is frightening.

In Canada we reached just over 61% turnout in the federal election in 2011, which was a slight rise from a historically low 59% in 2008. With the way our first past the post system works, that meant the Conservative Party of Canada became government with only about 40% of the total vote - working out to just 5-6 million people out of a country of 35 million.

Getting people to vote is extremely important, yes. But having a voting system that is fair and accurately represents voter preference is also necessary.

Unfortunately as I learned last week when I bought a copy of Diablo II from the Blizzard store, that's not always the case; D2 isn't supported under OSX 10.7 and above. That's not Blizzard's fault, as it was Apple who removed support for PowerPC applications, but it's an exception to your argument.

The idea that it's beneficial for every player on a hockey team to be same-handed shows quite an ignorance of the game. There is a left-wing position and a right-wing, and being able to either protect the puck from a defender, and/or have the best possible angle to shoot on net, depends very much on whether the player shoots left or right. This is further complicated by players who choose to shoot left despite being right-handed (see this blog post here, I couldn't find a better source)

The results of the study are interesting, and make somewhat intuitive sense, but they should be careful not to generalize to too great a degree.

That there should be canned responses from Conservative MPs is no surprise. Harper has put such a stranglehold on government communications (he what, tripled the number of communications staff?) that MPs no longer have the ability to present their individual views to their constituents.

This bill is going to be introduced, debate is going to be limited again based on the argument that it's been discussed previously, it will be passed through the House and the Senate, and there's really nothing we can do about it.

I think our American neighbours would be surprised to learn how much relative power the Prime Minister has over his government, compared to their President. When that power is exercised, it's virtually unstoppable, and it's terrifying.

"as it attempts to beat the likes of Apple and Google"

A strange choice of words. I think "as it attempts to compete with the likes of..." would be more accurate and desirable - the last thing the technology market needs these days is a single, clearcut winner (at least, if you're a consumer). That aside, as a Canadian I'd like to see RIM survive on its own and if this helps to shake things up then it's a welcome move; I don't fancy the thought of the Samsung chaebol gaining even more power than it already has.

Well then it's a good thing they're only hoping to go as far as Jupiter, where "the zodiacal light is 30 times fainter than at Earth". But don't take my word for it, try reading the article.

Maybe dining on lobsters and imported cognac while up to 3.5 million of his citizens died of starvation. If that doesn't count, then I'm not sure what does.

The famine occurred only just after he took power, so I guess you can argue that the blame is on Kim Il Sung and years of juche ideology. But make no mistake, Kim Jong Il was not a naive little boy trapped by circumstance. He was an egocentric sociopath who lived a life of luxury as his country struggled in abject poverty.

I agree completely that this isn't welcome, but don't underestimate the degree to which Kim Jong Un has been integrated into the power structure. Although from April 2009, there's an excellent article on Foreign Policy about the efforts to get him and his allies into key posts.

Having lived in Korea for almost six years (but since moved away) this news is disturbing and unsettling. While I don't predict anything drastic like a war, Kim Jong Un is going to have to prove himself to the people. If that means sinking another ship like the Cheonan, or shelling another island, or worse... then everyone on the peninsula should be prepared.